[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Yet another Sydney derailment
- Subject: Re: Yet another Sydney derailment
- From: "Brendan" <nadnerb_2000@NOSPAM.com.au>
- Date: 31 Jan 2000 17:04:46 +1000
- Newsgroups: aus.rail,misc.transport.rail.australia-nz
- References: <h9nl7s4pnp7fq8ipp7john73q1j3druhe2@4ax.com> <85f1jd$2ufs$1@otis.netspace.net.au> <387B2C8E.CD7B5251@where.com> <85gffm$5ce$1@lios.apana.org.au> <85is05$809$1@news1.mpx.com.au> <85n4d6$iue$1@lios.apana.org.au> <85o0la$8vj$2@news1.mpx.com.au> <3881c44b@pink.one.net.au> <870fla$srk$1@news1.mpx.com.au>
Whoops.
Dave Proctor <thadocta@spambait.dingoblue.net.au> wrote in article
<870fla$srk$1@news1.mpx.com.au>...
> Nobody wrote in message <3881c44b@pink.one.net.au>...
> >Not necessarily. Saying something you shouldnt have said can be illegal
in
> >most cases. In this case, if the affected person found out about the
> >defamation, he could contact police, who would then trace the server of
> the
> >poster and charge him with libel (printing or recording a defamatory
> >article). Particularly if it harms him.
>
> ROFL - police charge with libel? Ok, if you say so.
>
> The police are only interested in crimes. Libel is tortious (tort = civil
> wrong) and the policeprobably could not give a rats backside about it.
>
> Dave
>
>
>